IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

[1]         THE COURT:  These are my reasons for sentence. I reserve the right to order a transcript and edit these reasons for sentence to make them grammatically correct or more readable, but the result and substance of my decision will not change.

[2]         On March 20, 2024, Nicholas Wade Klassen entered several guilty pleas before the court here in Vernon, British Columbia:

[3]         Counsel did not present a joint submission to the court. The BC Prosecution Service has asked for 180 days' jail time minus time served. Ms. McPheeters, on behalf of Mr. Klassen, does not argue with the 180-day figure but says the sentence needs to account for the totality principle and, accordingly, a sentence of 90 days’ jail minus time served would be more appropriate.

[4]         Mr. Klassen had spent 26 days in custody as of March 20, 2024, when he entered his guilty pleas. Since then, he has spent an additional 26 days in custody, meaning he has spent 52 days in custody. I am applying credit for the time Mr. Klassen spent in custody awaiting his sentence at the rate of 1.5, meaning he will receive the equivalent of 78 days' pre-sentence credit.

[5]         I am going to repeat the facts in chronological order. However, I do so, noting Exhibits 1 and 2 in these proceedings. Exhibit 1 is Mr. Klassen's Certified Extract of British Columbia Driving Record, and Exhibit 2 is his JUSTIN Conviction List. Exhibits 1 and 2 confirm that before entering his guilty pleas on March 20, 2024, Mr. Klassen had five previous Criminal Code convictions for driving while prohibited. Furthermore, on each and every one of the dates for the infractions he pled guilty to on March 20, 2024, he was prohibited from driving pursuant to s. 320.24(1) and sub (2) of the Criminal Code, and s. 99 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Both driving prohibitions had been imposed on June 14, 2023, the day before the first offence that he pled guilty to on March 24, 2024.

[6]         Concerning File 57259-1, on June 15, 2023, at approximately 2:44 p.m., Constable Sanderson was advised over the police radio that a male driver was using a telephone while driving southbound in a black Dodge Caravan. Constable Sanderson pulled in behind the Dodge Caravan, activated his emergency lights, and conducted a traffic stop. As I indicated earlier, the driver of that motor vehicle was Mr. Klassen, who was prohibited from driving. Constable Sanderson approached the van and observed Mr. Klassen as the sole occupant and, of course, the driver of the motor vehicle. Mr. Klassen was not on a mobile telephone but was holding onto a cigarette packet.

[7]         Concerning File 57397-1, on the 21st of September, 2023, at approximately 2:32 in the afternoon, Constable Ricapa was on patrol in the Vernon area along Tronson Road when he observed a black Nissan Rogue SUV. Constable Ricapa performed police inquiries on the SUV, which indicated that the SUV did not have valid insurance as required by the Motor Vehicle Act. Constable Ricapa conducted a traffic stop. Mr. Klassen was the vehicle operator and, as I indicated earlier, prohibited from driving.

[8]         Concerning File 57417-1, on October 26, 2023, at about 8:40 in the morning, the RCMP received an anonymous telephone call that Mr. Klassen was driving a motor vehicle near 25th Avenue in Vernon, British Columbia. At approximately 9:47 a.m., Mr. Klassen appeared in courtroom 102 at the Provincial Court of British Columbia located at 27th Street and 30th Avenue in Vernon for an interim court appearance related to two separate allegations of driving while prohibited. At approximately 10:30 a.m., after Sergeant Evans advised Constable Roberts that Mr. Klassen had been observed driving northbound on 27th Street. Shortly after that, Mr. Klassen drove a motor vehicle in front of Constable Roberts. Constable Roberts initiated a motor vehicle stop of Mr. Klassen's vehicle. As I indicated earlier, Mr. Klassen was prohibited from driving all day on October 26, 2023, and he drove himself to and from the courthouse to appear in court on the allegations of driving while prohibited concerning files 57259-1 and 57397-1. Later that same evening, October 26, 2023, Mr. Klassen was back in court for a judicial interim release hearing. He was released from custody on a release order with a $1,000 deposit and a named surety, his wife, Lindsey Klassen. One of the release order conditions was that he must not occupy the driver's seat of any motor vehicle.

[9]         So, moving on then to File 57698-2-C, on February 25, 2024, Mr. Klassen is bound by the prohibitions. He is bound by a release order not to be in the driver's seat of any motor vehicle. At about 6:12 in the morning, an individual called the police to indicate that they had noted a driver exhibiting signs of being impaired as they were driving off in the -- sorry, nodding off in the driver's seat of a black Ford truck parked at the parking lot on 30th Avenue at approximately 37th Street, in Vernon. Ten minutes later, Constable Wright attended to the scene and located Mr. Klassen in the driver's seat of a motor vehicle. Police checks confirmed that the motor vehicle was not insured. Mr. Klassen provided Constable Wright with a B.C. Health Services Card and, during this interaction, Constable Wright detected an odour of alcohol coming from Mr. Klassen's breath. When asked if he had had anything to drink, Mr. Klassen admitted to the police officer that he had consumed alcohol the night before.

[10]      The BC Prosecution Service has sought a 180-day jail sentence, 45 days on each Information, to run consecutively to each other. Ms. McPheeters submits the court should give a sentence of 90 days jail minus time served, which would leave Mr. Klassen with 12 days of jail still to be served. The BC Prosecution Service has also asked for a $500 fine in relation to the s. 95 Motor Vehicle Act violation, a two-year Criminal Code driving prohibition and a two-year s. 98 Motor Vehicle Act driving prohibition.

[11]      Ms. McPheeters went into some great detail, and the court appreciates her thoroughness concerning Mr. Klassen's background and the circumstances that brought him to where he is today, sitting in a jail cell waiting to be sentenced. She noted that Mr. Klassen has pled guilty, which should be a mitigating factor concerning each of the four files.

[12]      Mr. Klassen’s sister and his mother have been very supportive of him and have attended numerous court appearances in support, including today. His wife, who no doubt would have wanted to have been here, is working and unable to be at court today.

[13]      Mr. Klassen is 41 years of age. He has drug-related addiction issues and, by the sounds of things, alcohol abuse-related issues as well. He has a long history of work. He is a business owner, owning 1st Klass Auto Works here in Vernon, British Columbia, although his being in jail has caused some issues for the business. Since 2021, when his father became ill, he has been significantly affected by his addictions. His father passed in 2022, and he has been struggling since then, in particular, with crack cocaine, methamphetamine, and alcohol.

[14]      He comes from a family which has, unfortunately, a history of individuals who have substance abuse and alcohol issues. To their credit, his mother has been clean and sober for five years; his sister has been clean and sober for over four years. They are trying to be good role models and positive support for Mr. Klassen. As indicated earlier, he is married, and his wife is trying to support the family financially while Mr. Klassen is in jail. He has two children, aged 12 and four. While struggling with his own demons, Mr. Klassen is trying to be a good father to his children. However, he realizes that he needs to get his life in order to be the best father and a positive role model for his children.

[15]      The other significant aspect is that while his wife is working, the family requires his additional work income to help with the expenses of living here in the Okanagan Valley. Ms. McPheeters has submitted that when Mr. Klassen is clean and sober, he is an excellent worker and a fabulous father. Finally, Ms. McPheeters submits that he has recognized that what he did on the four occasions was morally wrong and illegal.

[16]      Taking into consideration the facts, Mr. Klassen's circumstances, the submissions of Crown counsel, the submissions of Ms. McPheeters on behalf of Mr. Klassen, the mitigating and aggravating factors, and the principles and purposes of sentencing, I am of the view that additional jail time is required.

[17]      Quite frankly, during my time on the bench, this was the most aggravating case of driving while prohibited I have heard: a complete disregard for the rule of law. His prohibited driving on October 26, 2023, when he drove to court while prohibited from driving, attended court for files 57259-1 and 57397-1, and then drove away from the courthouse, is incredibly aggravating.

[18]      I am of the belief that in the unique circumstances of Mr. Klassen, concurrent sentences for each offence, as opposed to consecutive sentences, increasing in length chronologically, will better represent the reality of Mr. Klassen’s offences and meet the purposes and principles of sentencing.

[19]      So, Madam Clerk, beginning with File 57259-1, Count 1, the term of imprisonment I would have imposed before granting any credit is 45 days. The time spent in custody is 52 days. I am granting credit at a rate of 1.5 days for each day spent in custody. The total credit, therefore, I am granting is 78 days. The sentence imposed is 45 days' time served. There is, in addition, a s. 320.24(4) Criminal Code two-year driving prohibition, effective 24 hours a day, seven days a week, from the time you are let out of custody for two years.

[20]      THE CLERK:  And, my apologies, that section was 320.24 subsection?

[21]      THE COURT:  Four.

[22]      THE CLERK:  Thank you.

[23]      THE COURT:  Thank you.

[24]      Pursuant to s. 737(2.1) of the Criminal Code, I am satisfied that because of Mr. Klassen's precarious financial circumstances as set out before the court by his counsel on March 20, 2024, that the victim fine surcharge would cause undue hardship to him and, accordingly, I order that he pay no victim fine surcharge.

[25]      Moving on to File 57397, Count 1, the term of imprisonment I would have imposed before granting any credit is 90 days. The time spent in custody is 52 days. I am granting you credit at a rate of 1.5 days for each day spent in custody. The total credit I am granting you, therefore, is 78 days. The sentence imposed, therefore, is 78 days' time served plus 12 days' new jail. This sentence is to run concurrently with the previous file. There will, as well, be a s. 320.24(4) Criminal Code two-year driving prohibition, which will be in effect 24 hours a day, seven days a week, from the day you are released from custody, Mr. Klassen.

[26]      Concerning the victim fine surcharge, once again, I am waiving the victim fine surcharge for the reason I set out earlier.

[27]      In relation to File 57417-2-C, Count Number 1, the term of imprisonment I would have imposed before granting any credit is 135 days. The time spent in custody is 52 days. I am granting you credit at a rate of 1.5 days for each day spent in custody. The total credit I am, therefore, granting you is 78 days. The sentence imposed, therefore, is 78 days' time served plus 57 days' new time concurrent to the other two files. There will also be a s. 320.24(4) Criminal Code two-year driving prohibition, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, as of the day you are released from custody. 

[28]      I am also waiving the victim fine surcharge for the reasons I gave previously.

[29]      In relation to Count Number 2 of File 57417-2-C, there will be a fine of $500.

[30]      Pursuant to the Victims of Crime Act, s. 8.1 which states:

[31]      In relation to File 57689-2-C, the term of imprisonment I would have imposed before granting any credit is 180 days. I note that 180 days is just a few days shy of the six-month maximum allowable under the Motor Vehicle Act for a first offence under s. 234 of the Motor Vehicle Act. In my view, the aggravating factors involved in these four driving-while-prohibited offences require the near maximum penalty for a first offence, regardless of any explanation or excuse by Mr. Klassen.

[32]      The pre-sentence time spent in custody is 52 days. I am granting credit at a rate of 1.5 days. The total credit, therefore, I am granting is 78 days. The sentence imposed is 78 days' time served plus 102 days' new jail concurrent to the other three files. 

[33]      I am waiving the -- sorry, there is no victim levy surcharge in relation to that count because I did not impose a fine.

[34]      Ms. Park, did I miss anything from your perspective?

[35]      CNSL J. PARK:  No, Your Honour, thank you.

[36]      THE COURT:  Ms. McPheeters, did I miss anything from your perspective? I believe we have waived all the victim fine surcharges that I could waive. There is nothing I can do about the victim levy.

[37]      CNSL L. MCPHEETERS:  No, I think that's everything, and the time to pay, thank you, Your Honour.

[38]      THE COURT:  All right.

[39]      Mr. Klassen, I truly mean this when I say it, best of luck when you get out. Do what you need to do to get your lawful licence again. It is going to be a long process, but your family and, just as importantly, yourself will benefit from that. Good luck, sir.

[40]      THE CLERK:  And, Your Honour, I have some outstanding counts on each of the informations. 

[41]      THE ACCUSED:  So how much longer am I in for, Your Honour?

[42]      THE COURT:  So another 102 days minus whatever parole time you get.

[43]      THE ACCUSED:  Okay, thank you, Your Honour.

[44]      THE COURT:  Thank you.

[45]      CNSL J. PARK:  And Crown will direct a stay of proceedings on any remaining counts on all the information.

[46]      THE COURT:  On all four informations?

[47]      CNSL J. PARK:  Yes, thank you.

[48]      THE COURT:  Thank you.